|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 11, 2021, 11:06 AM | #51 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 405
|
Quote:
__________________
Support the Second Amendment Foundation and the Firearms Policy Coalition |
|
June 12, 2021, 11:37 PM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,872
|
Here is a interview with Chuck Michel , his office represents a couple of the cases in front of judge Roger T. Benitez regarding the 2nd amendment . Very interesting insight as to what's going on at the 9th .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZpz84TLOO0 He brings up this case is actually behind another AWB case ( Duncan ) already awaiting a decision of a an-banc panel . Which means if they strike down that case which does not have as good a ruling behind it as Benitez's ruling . It would just make his ruling moot and as if it never happened . In the interview Chuck talks about how he believes the 9th should stay all 2nd amendment cases until the the SCOTUS hears the NY carry case in front of them now . His thinking is that the SCOTUS will likely give guidance on what scrutiny pending and future cases should use in most 2nd amendment cases . That got me thinking if the 9th thinks they have the votes to strike down Duncan , they will before the SCOTUS rules on the NY case . Which will create precedent for all the cases log jammed at the 9th and allow they to strike them all down before next years ruling at the SCOTUS on the NY carry case . That said as chuck points out the 9th is now more equally divided and the en-banc panel in Duncan may actually vote in our favor . If the 9th sees that as a real possibility they may want to stay all the cases and wait for guidance from the SCOTUS next year . Anyways I found the interview thought provoking .
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . |
June 13, 2021, 04:49 AM | #53 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
The Compact facilitates sharing of licensing information between states, which means a database of drivers. If we apply that parallel to gun rights, we'd be accepting a national database of firearms owners, and nothing good comes from that. Moreover, while every state has to accept licenses issued by other states, they can define traffic laws as they see fit. The speed limit on I-90 might be 70mph in Ohio, but if you cross the state line and Indiana decides it's 45, they can do so. Individual states can restrict what kinds of vehicles they allow on roads, they can levy tolls, and they can even shut down the roads. If we imagine a 50-state gun compact, we can see how some states would simply put up roadblocks to make the carry of guns extremely difficult, if not dangerous.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
June 14, 2021, 10:17 PM | #54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,872
|
correction
I need to correct something in my last post . It "was" my understanding that the Duncan case awaiting an en-banc decision was a AWB case but it is not . It is a magazine capacity case and is in fact one of the cases judge Roger T. Benitez did hear and ruled in our favor . Also the en-banc panel has not heard the orals yet . In fact they are to be heard here late in June .
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . |
June 21, 2021, 09:07 PM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 405
|
To the surprise of no one, the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has granted an indefinite stay in Miller vs Bonta. More information at this link.
__________________
Support the Second Amendment Foundation and the Firearms Policy Coalition |
June 22, 2021, 07:50 PM | #56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,872
|
I was going to give an update but thought this video explains it best
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSANQImSBtU . It turns out the stay is pending two other cases that are already at the 9th circuit . Rupp vs Bonta and Duncan vs Bonta . It's funny how they word all these stays . Miller ( this case ) is stayed until Rupp ( AWB case ) is final and Rupp is stayed until Duncan ( a standard cap mag case ) is final . So when Chuck michel said we are waiting on Duncan he was right but I would have never guessed it was such a convoluted wait haha . I was wondering how a high cap mag case would settle the AWB case and now I know . FWIW Duncan had there oral arguments today with the 9th's en-banc panel . Here is the video of that proceedings https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faP79PUMUG8
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . |
June 22, 2021, 11:04 PM | #57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,872
|
Just watched the en-banc orals on Duncan . Can someone explain why it appears all 2nd amendment cases out of the 9th right now appear to be waiting on that case ? It would seem to me the court would want to finalize one of the AWB cases . I'd think that would make it clear what the other AWB case is and if magazines able to hold more then 10 rounds is ok . If you can have "assault" weapons , clearly you can have the standard mags that come with them .
Turn that around and lets say they find in Duncan ( mag restrictions ) that you don't have the right to have a mag that holds more then 10rds . OK so ... that does nothing to clear up if "assault" weapons can be banned or not . Why does the court have everything riding on Duncan ?
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . |
June 23, 2021, 10:43 AM | #58 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 24, 2008
Posts: 2,604
|
Quote:
In other words once the Ninth has spewed out some convoluted logic to explain how "in common use for lawful purposes" doesn't mean what it says, they won't have to do it again for Rupp and Miller.
__________________
Time Travelers' Wisdom: Never Do Yesterday What Should Be Done Tomorrow. If At Last You Do Succeed, Never Try Again. |
|
June 23, 2021, 03:37 PM | #59 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,872
|
Quote:
There was one analogy she made that I thought was good when talking about modifying the mag you have and how the government thinks as long as you still have the mag they didn't infringe on the right . She come back with something like " It's like having two houses and the government makes you tear down one . Why should you complain you still have one of the houses to live in " What might have been better would have been saying Ok you have a 5 bedroom house and the government makes you seal off two bedrooms and one bath . You still have most of the house so why complain ?
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . Last edited by Metal god; June 23, 2021 at 03:49 PM. |
|
June 24, 2021, 11:10 AM | #60 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 24, 2008
Posts: 2,604
|
Quote:
But describing as minor, the burden on responsible, law-abiding citizens who may not possess a 15-round magazine for self-defense because there are other arms permitted with 10 or fewer rounds, is like saying that when government closes a Mormon church it is a minor burden because next door there is a Baptist church or a Hindu temple. Banning a weapon that is commonly used for lawful purposes is unconstitutional. The existence of alternatives doesn't change that.
__________________
Time Travelers' Wisdom: Never Do Yesterday What Should Be Done Tomorrow. If At Last You Do Succeed, Never Try Again. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|